BCT Editorial – 5/8/07

This page was last updated on May 12, 2007.

Doing harm; Editorial; Beaver County Times; May 8, 2007.

This is at least the 14^th anti-smoking editorial since March 2005. There have been so many the Times is recycling editorial titles. The previous 13 editorials were “Momentum,” “Banned in Beaver,” “Get used to it,” “Trendy #1,” “Straggling behind,” “Salutes & Boots,” “Smoked out #1,” “Smoked out #2,” “Smoked out #3,” “Trendy #2,” “Smoke free,” “Survey says smoking ban popular,” and “Inertia.” The comments in those critiques apply to this editorial as well.

Maybe it’s just me, but if I were writing an editorial to convince readers to agree with my position, I wouldn’t use “Trendy” as the title. To me, it conveys messages of smoke (no pun intended) blowing in the wind and/or being a slave to fashionable positions.

Below is a detailed critique of the subject editorial.

“As state lawmakers quake at the thought that someone somewhere in Pennsylvania would be offended by an indoor smoking ban, other states and municipalities are moving forward.”

[RWC] Right, instead “state lawmakers” should “quake at the thought that someone somewhere in Pennsylvania would be offended by” the lack of “an indoor smoking ban.”

When did taking choice away from law-abiding citizens on private property become “moving forward?”

“Ohio’s ban on indoor smoking went into effect on Thursday.

“A day earlier, the Illinois House of Representatives overwhelmingly approved (73-42) a measure already passed by the Senate that bans smoking in public places.”

[RWC] As I’ve noted before, note the bogus use of the term “public places.” As a reminder, restaurants, bars, et cetera are private property. As detailed below, even private clubs count as “public places.” Things like a courthouse are public property and I have no problem with legislators banning smoking in taxpayer-owned buildings.

As a reminder, many (most?) smoking ban laws also treat private clubs as “public places.” The Allegheny County ban covers private clubs because it bans smoking “In any workplace” (section 880-2.A.1.4).

“Smoke-Free Arizona went into effect on Tuesday, and Hilton Head Island, S.C., has banned indoor smoking in restaurants, bars and businesses.

“More than anything else, the failure of Pennsylvania lawmakers to act on this issue is representative of the ‘first do no harm’ approach that they take to their political careers.

“Never mind that while they shirk their responsibilities, they are doing harm to workers and patrons who needlessly continue to be exposed to second-hand smoke.”

[RWC] Perhaps I go to the wrong businesses, but so far I’ve seen no one force employees or patrons into businesses that permit smoking. Individuals on private property are there by choice. No one forces anyone to work at or patronize a business, club, et cetera that allows smoking.